When is @property going to start being enforced, i.e. when are you going to no longer be able to call non @property functions w/o ()s or assign using the = sign to a n...@property function? I never really followed the newsgroup discussion b/c I was happy with the old status quo and didn't think Walter would give in, so I lost track of what exactly @property even does.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]>wrote: > On 06/23/2010 10:59 AM, Max Samukha wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I think it should be a property. I followed the convention that >> stuff that doesn't change "this" is a property. >> >> Andrei >> >> >> But property setters are often supposed to change 'this'? >> > > Well of course I was referring to getters. > > > Honestly I can >> hardly see much utility in @property. For example, Q_PROPERTY in Qt adds >> value. It is introspectable, can fire a notification when changed, >> optionally shows up in the designer, is resettable to a default value >> and more. Is @property only useful for disambiguating the case when a >> function returns a callable? >> > > On the same grounds, I opposed @property tooth and nail and now, > unpleasantly enough, my worst scares are coming true: @property is a > non-falsifiable sham, a convention defined for the sake of following it. I > strongly believe the alternatives I proposed would have been vastly better. > > > Andrei > > _______________________________________________ > phobos mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos >
_______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
